Guess who lost!!

[Ithaca 37]

I've been telling you anti wildlife habitat, anti environment wackos you've already lost the war, but you didn't believe me!

"A former Democratic congressman from Montana said Western leaders are hurting the region´s political clout by fighting a war against environmentalism he says has already been decided.
“Yes, this war has ended, and the conservationists have won,” said Pat Williams, who has retired from politics to teach at the University of Montana in Missoula..........................................Williams quoted polls supporting environmental protection, and the support indicated, even in Idaho, for President Clinton´s roadless initiative and wolf reintroduction as examples that the battle for public opinion between resource industries and environmentalists has ended after more than two decades."

I've been telling you you're irrelevent, too!

"Williams said the scenario resembles what happened in the South, when established politicos refused to concede to the rest of the country on segregation and civil rights. In the long run, the region suffered as the lawmakers became marginalized and ineffective.

“They became irrelevant, and they still are today,” Williams said. "

http://www.idahostatesman.com/Story.asp?ID=39307

 

[ELKCHSR]

This is all very good reading guy's..Thanks..

 

[Ithaca 37]

Lean, "who want to just "bring it all down, man!", and ban ranching,".

Interesting accusation, but completely wrong about me. Maybe you're not paying attention. How about quoting me saying I want to ban ranching?

As for the book being propaganda---why don't you do something to refute the propaganda? With all the whining from welfare ranchers about how they're misunderstood, nobody here has EVER been able to make a logical case for continuing welfare ranching. I can't even remember anyone trying. It can't be done, but you sound like a good one to try. Good luck!

And how do you know I don't question anything people write or say about welfare ranching? You and a few other people seem to think I should be presenting all sides of every issue here. WRONG. I present my side. You wanna present your side---go ahead. Otherwise you lose the debate.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-09-2003 10:03: Message edited by: Ithaca 37 ]</font>

 

[Leanwolf]

Now now now Ithaca 37, you're allowing your obsession with destroying the ranching industry in the West, to cloud your ability to see how blatant a hypocrite this left wing Democrat, Pat Williams, is.

You might reread the article you posted (I'd already read it in today's Statesman), to notice that on the one hand, he screams so smugly about "demagogues," then turns right around and demagogues, right along with the best of them.

Then he "quotes polls" that say that most everybody (except the evil welfare ranchers and farmers) wants his (and your) type of preservation laws passed," and then ohhh soooo smugly states that anyone who disagrees with him and his comrades back east, is "no longer relevant." And then says with such great relish, the enviros are "bayonetting the dead and dying..." people who do not want to destroy ranching, farming, mining, oil drilling, lumbering, etc. Great analogy, huh? Hmmmmmm.

I wonder who is the major funder of his organization, there in Montana??

Williams rhetoric reminds me of Teddy Kennedy's blundering, drunken, illogical screaming. What a role model!!

If I recall (maybe some of you Montana residents can verify this?), but Williams, when he was a Democrat Congressman, was also in the pocket of the extreme left wing gun grabbers, there in D.C., too. Wasn't he also a big suck ass of the King and Queen, Klinton Rex & Regina???

What is Williams', et al, REAL agenda and FINAL GOAL?? I'd bet some money it ain't real pretty.

And as for that "Welfare Ranching" book you posted, where does the money come from that funded that piece of disingenuous propaganda?? A whole lot of distortions and disinformation in that little diatribe, too.

As for the "statistics" posted in that book, and by the ranching banners side, let's not forget what the great writer, Mark Twain once said. "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." Statistics are a double edged sword: they cut BOTH ways. So I think a wise person whould question "statistics" no matter which side slings them around.

Itahca 37, I'm surprised you do not question anything these people whom you so idolize, write or say.

Just to get it straight here, I am well aware there is a need for some revivions of the grazing laws on BLM/N.F. land. But I disagree strongly with you and others here who want to just "bring it all down, man!", and ban ranching, if the rancher uses any of the public lands. (Don't the "public lands," also belong to the ranchers?? Or, do they only belong to the enviros??)

Extremes on both sides, are dangerous, and destructive.

Oh well, we all have our opinions, don't we?

FWIW. L.W.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Leanwolf,

You posted: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>And then says with such great relish, the enviros are "bayonetting the dead and dying..." people who do not want to destroy ranching, farming, mining, oil drilling, lumbering, etc. Great analogy, huh? Hmmmmmm.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The statesman wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Skirmishes and other minor battles continue to play out, he said, but most of the action consists of environmentalists “bayonetting the dead and dying” and industry lobbyists “chanting for a magical return of the buffalo.” <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My question is, where did you get the part on people who do not want to destroy ranching, farming, mining, oil drilling, lumbering, etc

I don't know that very many people want to destroy ranching. I do know people want to end Welfare Ranching but that is a different group of people than the true ranchers on private ground. I don't know why any environmtal group would want to destroy farming. I could see where some practices should be changed, like burning grass fields in Northern Idaho, but hopefully nobody wants to destroy farming.

Who knows on mining.

As long as it doesn't hurt salmon and steelhead in Idaho, I might be ok with it... Not sure...

Oil drilling? That is always a tough one, as many of the great places for Oil are also special places, with fragile ecosystems. I say drill in Iraq, now that we own it.

I guess my point is, I don't know that anybody wants to destroy ranching, farming, mining, oil drilling, lumbering, etc. But my guess is many want to modify the parts of the industries that kill the Fish and Game that we want to kill.

But I agree that much of the battle in the West has already been won, and the losers, in many cases, are not aware they have lost. The Civil Rights analogy was actually a pretty good one, as Strom Thurmond and Trent Lott found out.... I think the Welfare Ranching battle has already been won. I think Lumbering via clear cutting has already been won.

In any event, thanks for your post, and you bring some good points up. And although you try and "kill the messenger", Mr. Pat Williams, I don't know if the "message" didn't survive.

 

[Ten Bears]

IT, your so obsessed with "winning" a debate, you refuse to listen to others. You and BUZZ (go tell him I used his name here if it makes you feel better) are so into "winning the debate" that you are both blind to anything else.

 

[Ithaca 37]

No , what I'm interested in is facts---not just a bunch of opinions based on fantasies and myths.

 

[Ten Bears]

You are only interested in the facts that serve your purposes, and you try to ignore any facts presented by any who oppose you.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Ten, Give us some facts, then, not just all your opinions. You seem to have a problem differentiating between them.

 

[Ten Bears]

Which "facts" would you like me to post? You have provided no "facts" here.

 

[danr55]

Is this Pat Williams related to Bagdahd Bob??

I always wonder about an enemy who spends an inordinate amout of time telling me I've already lost the war. Makes me wonder whether he's trying to convince me or him...

 

[Ithaca 37]

Ten, Not in this thread, but in plenty of others. We rarely see anything to substantiate what you say in your posts. That's another reason you're irrelevent.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 05-12-2003 16:37: Message edited by: Ithaca 37 ]</font>

 

[Ten Bears]

IT, once again you attempt to confuse the issue with unfounded accusations.

I reference all my sources, but you seem to be the one that often says it's not your job to provide the source, and that others should do their own research.

 

[Lostagain]

Then it must be time to do away with all the landuse govt agencies. What the hell do we want to waste our money on that bunch of resource experts when all we need is a bunch of lawenforcement cops. That ought to save soooo much money, cops are way cheaper than resource experts, biologists, hydrologists. Way cheaper, no more roads, culverts, livestock grazing.... don't need many gov't employees.

 

[Troy Jones]

If you can't hunt it, log it, mine it, or graze it... DAM IT!

 

[Ithaca 37]

Todays letter to the editor:

"The declaration of former Democratic Rep. Pat Williams (Statesman, May 8) that “conservationism has won” in Western U.S. battles over the use of natural resources could be summed up in my mind with, “Well, you could have fooled me.”

Few issues of news out of Bush headquarters fail to feature some setback of environmental gains. All Bush appointees are avowed haters of any environmental controls and feature a good number out of the old James Watt camp.

The first lawsuit that stopped a U.S. Forest Service clearcut was conducted by squirrel hunters in the East.

Since then, the public has been educated by such books as the Sierra Club book “Clearcut.” The millions of acres of devastated forestland in the United States and Canada pictured in this massive book are a testimonial to greed uncontrolled. It hasn´t stopped.

Federal lands still are grazed by cattle and sheep, even though only 2 percent of the total U.S. production needs or uses this subsidy. View the terraced, cattle trails on the steep slopes as you travel to Idaho City. This devastation, coupled with the incursion of introduced weeds, promises fires, erosion and ruin.

The “extractionists” are not defeated by a long shot, but I do hope we are gaining on them.

Homer Millard, Boise"

 

[Ten Bears]

Those terraced slopes are used by cattle, but I doubt the terraces are created by cattle.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Ten, what do you think caused all those little terraces across the slopes--ground squirrels?

You really should try to be more observent and questioning. It'll make you a more successful hunter, too.

 

[Ten Bears]

Odd, the "origin" of those terraces were explained to me by a biologist. I to thought that they originated from cattle grazing, but was corrected by a research project leader (Craig Mountain, ID). I was told that, more recently, they are thought to be the product of a combination of wind & water erosion and vegitation type. Maybe you could do some research.

BTW I seem to be doing pretty good in the hunting department, ATV or not.